Hi Dan, thank you for your comment. We are both well aware of the problems with current regulation. I personally believe however that the problem of excess deaths is multidimensional and complex (see all our posts on the topic and the ones coming out this morning and tomorrow morning).
We are also working on a post showing how the British Health Minister completely sidestepped a question in the House on the whole issue. There is no single cause, and teasing all the variables out the equation and weighing them is a big job but not an impossible one. The problem is that governments are the only ones with access to the data and they are also the ones that stand to lose most from a properly conducted investigation.
The problem is, those who call us conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that vaccines are part of that equation whereas I/we are simply asking for a full investigation with all factors considered.
Hi Dick, thank you for the comment which is very useful to help us communicate better.
We are working on another couple of posts along the same line. We do not know why governments around the world do not seem to take the problem seriously and as you say the vacuum is breeding conspiracy theories. Best wishes, Tom
There is an extensive history of poor regulatory practices, leading to unsafe products causing extreme harm, leading to attempts to cover up the links between the two.
That is the very definition of a criminal conspiracy.
If you were checking the history of prospective child minder and you saw that they had a history of killing children I’m not sure you’d ever trust them to look after your child.
We so called “conspiracy theorists” are being asked to do just that.
The problem I have with the term “conspiracy theorist” is that its now synonymous with those who simply ask questions that counter popular narratives.
Until a hypothesis is proven or disproven using robust, repeatable scientific methods then it is not a conspiracy theory.
I had a debate with Journo Christopher Snowdon about this on his substack about Baader Meinhof syndrome.
Chris believes that “crackpot conspiracy theorists” are seeing healthy young people dropping like flies or defibrillators being positioned outside schools and hugely exaggerating the incidence rate simply because they’re looking for it.
A type of confirmation bias I suppose.
I think Chris has a point, I find myself doing it.
I’ve lost count of the amount of people I’ve spoken to recently who have a loved one or friend who’s just suffered a heart attack, stroke or blood clot.
My immediate train of thought is to assume it’s vaccine related.
The truth is I don’t know enough about the person to judge. I some cases I don’t even know if that person was vaccinated, so I base my assumption on the likelihood that most people took at least 1 or 2.
However, I also think this happens on the other side of the argument.
People like Chris who’ve taken every jab offered, refuse to even consider that vaccines could be contributing to excess deaths.
He looks at the worrying excess mortality rates and instantly assigns any cause other than vaccines.
He uses the Yellow Card System and the 51 attributed official vaccine deaths (via ONS) as ultimate proof that the authorities are monitoring vaccine safety very carefully.
The contradiction here is that Yellow Card attributes thousands of deaths to vaccine related adverse reactions. Yet, when that is mentioned it’s an artefact of over reporting by members of the public.
When I explained to Chris that not all deaths are investigated and therefore many vaccine induced heart complications could have been missed, he said I was accusing doctors of falsifying death certificates.
Saying that an underlying cause leading to a heart attack or stroke is not always recorded on a death certificate is not the same as accusing doctors of falsifying death certificates.
Suggesting that incidental PCR + Covid infections led to massively inflated attribution of Covid on death certificates, is not a accusation of falsification. It’s an accusation of poor attribution and bad practice.
I told him that I was simply calling for a thorough investigation that included vaccines as a possible cause.
I also said that seeing as he had completely ruled them out of any investigation that the burden of proof was on him.
He replied that I was trying to convince people of a niche theory that the scientific community experts had already ruled out.
I responded by asking him which experts?
Whitty, who blamed declines in Statin prescriptions or Heneghan who debunked that theory days later.
I also mentioned that the scores of other drugs and devices that have caused unprecedented harms would also have started life as “niche theories”
Both sides are using poor quality observational evidence to support their entrenched arguments.
The most likely explanation is that truth is somewhere in between.
This is why I’m asking people to look at reputations rather than evidence at this present time.
The truth is that there isn’t any robust evidence because nothing is being investigated. Why not adopt a precautionary principle instead?
The question is, in the absence of any credible evidence who do you trust?
The captured regulators in bed with Big Pharma displaying a track record of coverups and patient safety failings leading to criminal fines. (All documented and provable)
Or
The so called Conspiracy Theorists.
A group of people all lumped together by Big State, Big Tech and the MSM who, when interrogated actually consists of highly credible Doctors and Scientists along with highly skeptical members of the public. Some of whom have been injured or lost loved ones to pharmaceutical products.
With excess deaths so high i’d say the safer bet is the latter because if we turn out to be wrong nothing that bad happens. (See Covid vaccine hesitant Africa and millions of healthy unvaccinated people for details)
On the other hand if it turns out we’re right these excess deaths could be the tip of a very large iceberg.
Thanks for the podcast. It adds a lot to hear you two discussing issues rather than just reading your notes. Like you, I am astounded by the authorities' lack of concern to investigate what's happening. I hate myself for thinking it, since it makes me sound like a conspiracy theorist, but their silence on the subject suggests that evidence does exist that they don't want to be investigated.
Hi Dan, thank you for your comment. We are both well aware of the problems with current regulation. I personally believe however that the problem of excess deaths is multidimensional and complex (see all our posts on the topic and the ones coming out this morning and tomorrow morning).
We are also working on a post showing how the British Health Minister completely sidestepped a question in the House on the whole issue. There is no single cause, and teasing all the variables out the equation and weighing them is a big job but not an impossible one. The problem is that governments are the only ones with access to the data and they are also the ones that stand to lose most from a properly conducted investigation.
Best wishes, Tom
I totally agree Tom
The issue is definitely multi factorial.
The problem is, those who call us conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that vaccines are part of that equation whereas I/we are simply asking for a full investigation with all factors considered.
Hi Dick, thank you for the comment which is very useful to help us communicate better.
We are working on another couple of posts along the same line. We do not know why governments around the world do not seem to take the problem seriously and as you say the vacuum is breeding conspiracy theories. Best wishes, Tom
conspiracy
kən-spîr′ə-sē
noun
An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
A group of conspirators.
An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
Tom,
Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s just the absence of an investigation into excess deaths breading “conspiracy theories”
The only conspiracy theory is believing that big pharma and their captured regulators aren’t capable of inflicting such damage.
Opioid Scandal Purdue Pharma - $8 Billion settlement - October 2020
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54636002
Dengvaxia Scandal - Prominent researcher indicted over unsafe Dengue vaccine:
https://www.science.org/content/article/dengue-vaccine-fiasco-leads-criminal-charges-researcher-philippines
Trovan trials - In 1996 11 Nigerian Children were killed - families reach an out of court settlement with Pfizer:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14493277
There is an extensive history of poor regulatory practices, leading to unsafe products causing extreme harm, leading to attempts to cover up the links between the two.
That is the very definition of a criminal conspiracy.
If you were checking the history of prospective child minder and you saw that they had a history of killing children I’m not sure you’d ever trust them to look after your child.
We so called “conspiracy theorists” are being asked to do just that.
I rather be called a conspiracy theorist!
It’s much safer!
The problem I have with the term “conspiracy theorist” is that its now synonymous with those who simply ask questions that counter popular narratives.
Until a hypothesis is proven or disproven using robust, repeatable scientific methods then it is not a conspiracy theory.
I had a debate with Journo Christopher Snowdon about this on his substack about Baader Meinhof syndrome.
Chris believes that “crackpot conspiracy theorists” are seeing healthy young people dropping like flies or defibrillators being positioned outside schools and hugely exaggerating the incidence rate simply because they’re looking for it.
A type of confirmation bias I suppose.
I think Chris has a point, I find myself doing it.
I’ve lost count of the amount of people I’ve spoken to recently who have a loved one or friend who’s just suffered a heart attack, stroke or blood clot.
My immediate train of thought is to assume it’s vaccine related.
The truth is I don’t know enough about the person to judge. I some cases I don’t even know if that person was vaccinated, so I base my assumption on the likelihood that most people took at least 1 or 2.
However, I also think this happens on the other side of the argument.
People like Chris who’ve taken every jab offered, refuse to even consider that vaccines could be contributing to excess deaths.
He looks at the worrying excess mortality rates and instantly assigns any cause other than vaccines.
He uses the Yellow Card System and the 51 attributed official vaccine deaths (via ONS) as ultimate proof that the authorities are monitoring vaccine safety very carefully.
The contradiction here is that Yellow Card attributes thousands of deaths to vaccine related adverse reactions. Yet, when that is mentioned it’s an artefact of over reporting by members of the public.
When I explained to Chris that not all deaths are investigated and therefore many vaccine induced heart complications could have been missed, he said I was accusing doctors of falsifying death certificates.
Saying that an underlying cause leading to a heart attack or stroke is not always recorded on a death certificate is not the same as accusing doctors of falsifying death certificates.
Suggesting that incidental PCR + Covid infections led to massively inflated attribution of Covid on death certificates, is not a accusation of falsification. It’s an accusation of poor attribution and bad practice.
I told him that I was simply calling for a thorough investigation that included vaccines as a possible cause.
I also said that seeing as he had completely ruled them out of any investigation that the burden of proof was on him.
He replied that I was trying to convince people of a niche theory that the scientific community experts had already ruled out.
I responded by asking him which experts?
Whitty, who blamed declines in Statin prescriptions or Heneghan who debunked that theory days later.
I also mentioned that the scores of other drugs and devices that have caused unprecedented harms would also have started life as “niche theories”
Both sides are using poor quality observational evidence to support their entrenched arguments.
The most likely explanation is that truth is somewhere in between.
This is why I’m asking people to look at reputations rather than evidence at this present time.
The truth is that there isn’t any robust evidence because nothing is being investigated. Why not adopt a precautionary principle instead?
The question is, in the absence of any credible evidence who do you trust?
The captured regulators in bed with Big Pharma displaying a track record of coverups and patient safety failings leading to criminal fines. (All documented and provable)
Or
The so called Conspiracy Theorists.
A group of people all lumped together by Big State, Big Tech and the MSM who, when interrogated actually consists of highly credible Doctors and Scientists along with highly skeptical members of the public. Some of whom have been injured or lost loved ones to pharmaceutical products.
With excess deaths so high i’d say the safer bet is the latter because if we turn out to be wrong nothing that bad happens. (See Covid vaccine hesitant Africa and millions of healthy unvaccinated people for details)
On the other hand if it turns out we’re right these excess deaths could be the tip of a very large iceberg.
Thanks for listening
Dan
Also,
I believe we do know why governments around the world don’t want to investigate the problem.
Because whatever the outcome of such an investigation it is almost certain that that their Covid policies have caused the excess deaths.
Thanks for the podcast. It adds a lot to hear you two discussing issues rather than just reading your notes. Like you, I am astounded by the authorities' lack of concern to investigate what's happening. I hate myself for thinking it, since it makes me sound like a conspiracy theorist, but their silence on the subject suggests that evidence does exist that they don't want to be investigated.